Who wrote the FPW FAQ? Is there anything in there that we can quickly adapt into wiki articles?



I think that the current state of criminal neglect goes to show how much nit-picking or attention of any kind FPW's books get subjected to over at wikipedia.

Wikipedia is the biggest online encyclopedia and at the top of nearly every google search you'll ever perfrom. It's not perfect, but it's a great place to start.

There are about 500 entries on Wikipedia for the Repairman Jack entry. The earliest one was "Tyoda" in early 2005, but there is a "Dejo.eh" in there a fair bit in the summer of 2006 (I wonder who that could be?)

...so we can probably count on him for some suggestions on Wiki structure.

It looks like the poster Fatal Entwine, up until November 2007, was the most prolific editor however.

-Wapitikev

Who wrote the FPW FAQ? Is there anything in there that we can quickly adapt into wiki articles?

There's a fair bit that could be recycled from the entries on Wiki...at least as a starting point, but in the end it would be far clearer for copyright if we rewrote what we were happiest with from Wiki and threw the rest out, if we are going to create our own.

...assuming that we don't simply take over the Wiki articles and completely revamp them, that is.

-Wapitikev

There's a fair bit that could be recycled from the entries on Wiki...at least as a starting point, but in the end it would be far clearer for copyright if we rewrote what we were happiest with from Wiki and threw the rest out, if we are going to create our own.

...assuming that we don't simply take over the Wiki articles and completely revamp them, that is.

-Wapitikev

I don't think you get what Copyright is.

Wikipedia is edited by anyone. if someone wrote something on wikipedia they did so with that knowledge. we can keep/delete/rewrite anything on wikipedia.

We can write whatever we like about Jack and FPW's books and as long as we don't copy any passages that's perfectly legit (FPW has said so himself)

If whomever amongst us who wrote the FAQ says so, we can copy and paste chunks straight from there to wikipedia. But seeing as though the FAQ is freely available to download from this site anyway we could prob get away with doing so without their permission and call it Fair Use. You can't steal something that's already free.

I don't think you get what Copyright is.

Wikipedia is edited by anyone. if someone wrote something on wikipedia they did so with that knowledge. we can keep/delete/rewrite anything on wikipedia.

We can write whatever we like about Jack and FPW's books and as long as we don't copy any passages that's perfectly legit (FPW has said so himself)

If whomever amongst us who wrote the FAQ says so, we can copy and paste chunks straight from there to wikipedia. But seeing as though the FAQ is freely available to download from this site anyway we could prob get away with doing so without their permission and call it Fair Use. You can't steal something that's already free.

Since I can quote most of the Canadian Copyright Act, I think my understanding of copyright is pretty well developed...but I'm talking more about not getting accused by someone of blatantly copying from Wikipedia...not about avoiding being sued.

Besides, If we can't re-write the best bits from Wiki and get something that's snappier, then what are we doing even talking about this project in the first place?

Talk to MarcB about the authors for the FAQ, he's one of them.

And as far as not stealing something that appears to be free...now I think it is you who needs a lesson in copyright...text posted on a website is still copyright of the person who created it. Simply because F. Paul Wilson (or someone else for that matter) posts something on his website does not make it legal to copy it as much as you want...easy does not mean free.

For example, if I take a picture from your web-blog, Bones, and make a thousand t-shirts and sell them and give you no credit or money, have I violated your copyright to your image? You bet your sweet bullocks I have. Just because it was freely available on your web-site does not make it copyright free.

If we use large sections of the FAQ, even if we give credit for it, we are still violating copyright unless we get their permission first.

Having said that, it shouldn't be a big problem, right Marc and company?

-Wapitikev

*sigh*

I can see this developing into 'one of those things' when really there should be no issue at all.

Since I can quote most of the Canadian Copyright Act, I think my understanding of copyright is pretty well developed...

You just earned yourself a cookie. :p

but I'm talking more about not getting accused by someone of blatantly copying from Wikipedia...not about avoiding being sued.

Slightly over the top? Maybe? Sued for editing a wikipedia page? Get real, hippy.

Besides, If we can't re-write the best bits from Wiki and get something that's snappier, then what are we doing even talking about this project in the first place?

Here here.

Talk to MarcB about the authors for the FAQ, he's one of them.

Yep, I'll get on with that if he doesnt read this thread anyway.

And as far as not stealing something that appears to be free...now I think it is you who needs a lesson in copyright...

oh fuck, here it comes . . . .

text posted on a website is still copyright of the person who created it. Simply because F. Paul Wilson (or someone else for that matter) posts something on his website does not make it legal to copy it as much as you want...easy does not mean free.

Unless you give away the copright. Like if you were writing on wikipedia, the point of which is that your text will be messed with.

For example, if I take a picture from your web-blog, Bones, and make a thousand t-shirts and sell them and give you no credit or money, have I violated your copyright to your image? You bet your sweet bullocks I have. Just because it was freely available on your web-site does not make it copyright free.

And I would sue you for the profit you made. What kinda profit are you looking at making out of these wikipedia entries, wapitikev?

Don't be such a sissy

If we use large sections of the FAQ, even if we give credit for it, we are still violating copyright unless we get their permission first.

No.

It's fair use as long as (amongst other things) our use of it doesnt mess up their ability to continue to profit from their work.

If you make t-shirts from my work and sell them to everybody who wants one, that means I cant sell them for myself.

Having said that, it shouldn't be a big problem, right Marc and company?

-Wapitikev

That was fun. Now do me!!

*sigh*

I can see this developing into 'one of those things' when really there should be no issue at all.

You can easily avoid issues such as this by not going around telling people what they do and do not "get".

Just a helpful hint, from one sissy to another.



-Wapitikev

You can easily avoid issues such as this by not going around telling people what they do and do not "get".

Just a helpful hint, from one sissy to another.



-Wapitikev

You're the one wetting his pants about the legal ramifications of editing wikipedia FFS!

Anyway, copyright law is differnt in every country and most of it dates back to the 18th century. It is impossible to apply or enforce in 21st century online situations, as all major film studios and record labels are discovering.

You're the one wetting his pants about the legal ramifications of editing wikipedia FFS!

Anyway, copyright law is differnt in every country and most of it dates back to the 18th century. It is impossible to apply or enforce in 21st century online situations, as all major film studios and record labels are discovering.

*sigh*

Obsess much?

...you may be flogging this issue longer than necessary...I conceded in my first post of indignant outrage (you know, the one you wrote the book on in reply) that I was not using copyright in the strict legal sense vis-a-vis Wikipedia. Rather I was saying that we should save ourselves the ignominy of ever being accused of lifting straight from Wikipedia because we could do better by taking interesting bits from there and re-writing them ourselves.

...but some people just need to make a big deal of things and then won't let them go.

Switch to decaf, Bones...and watch the f-word, we have minors here.

-Wapitikev

*sigh*

Obsess much?

...you may be flogging this issue longer than necessary...I conceded in my first post of indignant outrage (you know, the one you wrote the book on in reply) that I was not using copyright in the strict legal sense vis-a-vis Wikipedia. Rather I was saying that we should save ourselves the ignominy of ever being accused of lifting straight from Wikipedia because we could do better by taking interesting bits from there and re-writing them ourselves.

...but some people just need to make a big deal of things and then won't let them go.

Switch to decaf, Bones...and watch the f-word, we have minors here.

-Wapitikev

Actually, I was pleasently suprised at how clean this site is. Most forums have a bunch of swears and horrid propositions, or at least teenage ones.:mad: I have no problem with an occational swear, and that very well my be the case for the other minors on the board. Also, I think that this copyright conversation is very childish, and if either of you want to continue being friendly towards eachother in the future, you may want to stop the escalation of this argument before it gets completely out of hand. I'm really sorry for the harshness, but I think that neither of you want to muck up your friendship.

Actually, I was pleasently suprised at how clean this site is. Most forums have a bunch of swears and horrid propositions, or at least teenage ones.:mad: I have no problem with an occational swear, and that very well my be the case for the other minors on the board. Also, I think that this copyright conversation is very childish, and if either of you want to continue being friendly towards eachother in the future, you may want to stop the escalation of this argument before it gets completely out of hand. I'm really sorry for the harshness, but I think that neither of you want to muck up your friendship.

Yeah most of the sex talk and flirting is reserved for PMs :crazy:

That pesky Maggers just can't stop sending them! (JOKE OK JOKE BEFORE I GET FLAMED)